Trade Rumours and Proposals Thread Part 17: What does "bold" mean?

Why do people hate on draft picks? It amazes me how before a draft Nail Yakupov is just "a draft pick" but once he's selected and plays half a season he's our best goal scorer and a future 40 goal guy.

It's an overpayment.

Generally speaking and certainly in this case, the difference in player at #1 and #7 is going to be fairly wide. Aren't we in a trade this pick for something that can help now mode? I would say Berglund fits that bill almost to a tee. Stick Gagner and Yakupov on 2L Wing positions?

I'm not sure if it's because they're playing well in Toronto this year, but guys like Orr, Brown and McLaren aren't generally suited up in the playoffs. So why are we trying to poach them from Toronto?

In a perfect world my fourth line buries them in their own end for the entirety of their shift, which happens to be what Boston has done in their series.

The only thing that I'd take from this Toronto team is their compete level, because quite honestly, they aren't very good.

Since when are draft picks better than real NHL players?
edit: I really like Berglund so maybe I'm biased but Don't Monahan and Lindholm project to be similar?

I doubt Monhan/Lindholm , in an especially deep draft, share the same projection as Berglund did in his draft year where he was drafted 25th overall. Don't get wrong I think Berglund is a fine player and I would love have to him but not at the cost of 7th overall. Berglund is big, has a good shot, goes to the net and is sound defensively but I think he is ideally a 3rd line center (which he currently is) for what he brings.
I don't think trading a 3rd line Center for the 7th overall pick is a fair trade for us.

I doubt Monhan/Lindholm , in an especially deep draft, share the same projection as Berglund did in his draft year where he was drafted 25th overall. Don't get wrong I think Berglund is a fine player and I would love have to him but not at the cost of 7th overall. Berglund is big, has a good shot, goes to the net and is sound defensively but I think he is ideally a 3rd line center (which he currently is) for what he brings.
I don't think trading a 3rd line Center for the 7th overall pick is a fair trade for us.

Wow Berglund scored 50 pts in 10-11 as a 3rd line centre? He could be Horcoff as he should have been. A nice 2nd line C. Sometimes Players significantly outplay their Draft Projections, and so the value increases. I'm just saying I don't think STL does this.

I was just listening to Nielson and Fraser and they had Ryan Rishaug on, and he was talking about what we got offered at the trade dead line for Hemsky. he said we got offered not once but twice ________. then my feed cut off and i missed it. was anyone else listening that could fill me in on what it was?

Generally speaking and certainly in this case, the difference in player at #1 and #7 is going to be fairly wide. Aren't we in a trade this pick for something that can help now mode? I would say Berglund fits that bill almost to a tee. Stick Gagner and Yakupov on 2L Wing positions?

Oooo RFA this year? Significantly Decreases his value. Defense has to be a priority I think. Even over size in the top 6. It's been an issue for too long.

Either him or Shartenkirk will be the odd man out. RFA whichever they can't afford, then use the Gagner + 7th OV to acquire a player that plays the opposite position of what we acquired via RFA from St Louis.

Berglund is not a 3C. He's been used as a 2C for the past two seasons, a move up that has interestingly coincided with STL becoming a really good team. They moved McDonald to W to make space for it. Sobotka is their 3C now, although Perron/Steen were playing C for them at times last year.

Berglund and his 50+ pts came in a season where STL was playing Oiler-style hockey. More offensive. His D that year was average. He's now more of a well-rounded player, and points have fallen accordingly.

He's not the ideal 2C. He's got great size, puck presence, and plays great with better-skilled wingers. But he's pretty bad at faceoffs, has limited offensive explosiveness, and may not be quick enough for wingers like MPS/Yak.

But IMO, he's the most reasonably acquirable 2C in the league right now, and shouldn't cost a stupid amount to sign.

He's also young and fits well with the young core of this team. Plenty of room to develop his game before he hits his prime in a couple years.

Berglund is not a 3C. He's been used as a 2C for the past two seasons, a move up that has interestingly coincided with STL becoming a really good team. They moved McDonald to W to make space for it. Sobotka is their 3C now, although Perron/Steen were playing C for them at times last year.

Berglund and his 50+ pts came in a season where STL was playing Oiler-style hockey. More offensive. His D that year was average. He's now more of a well-rounded player, and points have fallen accordingly.

He's not the ideal 2C. He's got great size, puck presence, and plays great with better-skilled wingers. But he's pretty bad at faceoffs, has limited offensive explosiveness, and may not be quick enough for wingers like MPS/Yak.

But IMO, he's the most reasonably acquirable 2C in the league right now, and shouldn't cost a stupid amount to sign.

He's also young and fits well with the young core of this team. Plenty of room to develop his game before he hits his prime in a couple years.

You won't convince me how good anybody that is drafted this year is until they prove it. And the proof, they say, is in the pudding.

I'm sorry but this is just such a weak argument. Obviously every single prospect needs to prove themself. By this logic you would pass on Crosby in his draft year because he hasn't proved himself at the NHL level yet.

We aren't going to agree on this though. So no point in getting into an argument.

Berglund is not a 3C. He's been used as a 2C for the past two seasons, a move up that has interestingly coincided with STL becoming a really good team. They moved McDonald to W to make space for it. Sobotka is their 3C now, although Perron/Steen were playing C for them at times last year.

Berglund and his 50+ pts came in a season where STL was playing Oiler-style hockey. More offensive. His D that year was average. He's now more of a well-rounded player, and points have fallen accordingly.

He's not the ideal 2C. He's got great size, puck presence, and plays great with better-skilled wingers. But he's pretty bad at faceoffs, has limited offensive explosiveness, and may not be quick enough for wingers like MPS/Yak.

But IMO, he's the most reasonably acquirable 2C in the league right now, and shouldn't cost a stupid amount to sign.

He's also young and fits well with the young core of this team. Plenty of room to develop his game before he hits his prime in a couple years.

My bad. I saw line combos where he ws listed as 3rd line Center for the playoffs.
I agree with your assement on him. Not ideal as a 2nd line C but he would be a perfect 3rd line Center with his skill set ( minus the faceoff issues which is obviously a biggie in that role).

The guy on lowetide yesterday said 7-15 have similar value, so for people to go out and start talking up just how great the #7 seems ridiculous.

it's the same **** every year. We could be drafting at 13 and we'd be here talking about just how good Lazar, Shinkaruak and Pulock are.

Looking post lockout around the #7 pick there isn't exactly a ton of players that are sure fire better than Berglund.

Totally agree. People get so caught up in prospects over proven NHL players. Not only will you have to wait years for the #7 pick to become as good as a player as Berglund, but they may never even turn into an NHL player at all. I'm not sure the value is there to move #7 for Berglund, but if he is the answer to our top 6 being much more difficult to play against, you have to think long and hard at it.

I'm sorry but this is just such a weak argument. Obviously every single prospect needs to prove themself. By this logic you would pass on Crosby in his draft year because he hasn't proved himself at the NHL level yet.

We aren't going to agree on this though. So no point in getting into an argument.

You said it didn't matter what they did until they prove themselves at the NHL. You can argue that Berglund is more valuable than the 7th overall pick but to completely dismiss all prospects isn't a proper premise.

I'm sorry but this is just such a weak argument. Obviously every single prospect needs to prove themself. By this logic you would pass on Crosby in his draft year because he hasn't proved himself at the NHL level yet.

We aren't going to agree on this though. So no point in getting into an argument.

Berglund is a perfect 3rd Center on a Cup contender. But there is no way you trade the #7 overall pick in one of the deepest drafts of the last 10 - 15 years for him. I think we are in the majority on that thinking. Poll time?

was anyone listening after 4 PM on Team 1260 yeaterday when Ryan Rishaug (sp?) basically said, without actually saying it, that the same deal that Nashville got for Martin Erat, which involved Filip Forsberg, was apparently offered to the Oilers and Tambo couldn't pull the trigger? if this is true, i am pretty mad and now VERY glad Mr. Conservative has been fired! thoughts?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Perfect Human

^Thought so. Although a lot of scouts are finding holes in Forsberg's game. Holes that no one was talking about before the draft. Maybe it's why he fell to 11th or whatever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by joestevens29

Holes or no holes wouldn't Forsberg be something that you could flip at the draft more easily?

Although I'm not going to blame Tambo. The whole freaking team of senior, mid-level, lower level management was there at TDD. I have to think ST would've asked for people's opinions.

or you keep Forsberg as an eventual replacement in the lineup for Hemsky, and continue to let Forsberg develop and work on those holes in his game. just because the Caps gave up on him and he needs a bit of work on his game doesn't make him any less of a good prospect.

Totally agree. People get so caught up in prospects over proven NHL players. Not only will you have to wait years for the #7 pick to become as good as a player as Berglund, but they may never even turn into an NHL player at all. I'm not sure the value is there to move #7 for Berglund, but if he is the answer to our top 6 being much more difficult to play against, you have to think long and hard at it.

Yep, 25 this summer, big, plays at both ends of the ice, at worse a 20-20 player.

Generally speaking and certainly in this case, the difference in player at #1 and #7 is going to be fairly wide. Aren't we in a trade this pick for something that can help now mode? I would say Berglund fits that bill almost to a tee. Stick Gagner and Yakupov on 2L Wing positions?

I am fine with having Berglund on this team but we still have to move out Hemsky and Gagner. Adding one player with size and keeping all of our skilled small players doesn't help the situation out. If we get Berglund I would still move Gagner and Hemsky to up grade the defense.
Having a top 6 of:
Hall; RNH; Eberle
PRV; Berglund; Yak
I would be ok with but we would need to add some grit on the 3rd and 4th lines that can still contribute.